The majority of Asian states have not signed onto the major international refugee law instruments which promote refugee recognition and protection. Yet, second to Africa, the Asian region has had the highest number of refugees since the Second World War. Three explanations are usually offered to explain this puzzle -"good neighbourliness", "economic costs" and "social disruption". In this article I argue that each is flawed in important ways and then develop an alternative by explaining how limited Asian involvement in the drafting of international refugee law has led Asian states to reject Eurocentric refugee recognition practices.